Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial granted, costs to appellants to abide the event, upon .the ground that the admission of plaintiff’s Exhibit 3 in evidence was prejudicial error. We are of opinion that this exhibit, despite the claim that its purpose was to show the dimensions of the haE with reference to the location of the hole in the floor, had for its only purpose an exhibition of subsequent repairs. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Carswell, Seudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.